Designer Drugs Could Sideline Olympic Stars ; Scrutiny of Athletes Could Lead to a First: US Competitors Being Barred from the Games without Their Testing Positive

Article excerpt

As antidoping officials move behind the scenes to build their
case against a dozen elite American athletes, the US Olympic
movement is inching closer to something it has not had for more than
a decade: international credibility.

The United States had been tarred as the closest thing to a new
East Germany since the end of the cold war - a country that said the
right things but protected its athletes behind a veil of secrecy.

Now, the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) is emphatically
dismissing such notions through its pursuit of any athletes
connected with BALCO, the Bay Area lab charged with producing
designer steroids. Yet as USADA considers banning athletes - even if
they have not tested positive - some observers wonder if it is going
too far.

The situation, all agree, is nearly impossible: How can you prove
someone took a drug designed to avoid detection? Answering that
question will not only define the American Olympic team this summer
in Athens but whether America is seen as a new leader in anti-
doping enforcement or merely a brute.

"We're at a crossroads here," says Steven Ungerleider, author of
"Faust's Gold," a book about doping in the former East Germany.
"We're carving out some new legal territory."

The idea of keeping an American athlete off the Olympic team
based on "nonanalytical positive" results - circumstantial evidence
is so convincing that it essentially amounts to a positive drug test
- is unprecedented.

Numerous reports suggest that USADA is considering using
nonanalytical positives against premier athletes such as sprinters
Marion Jones and Tim Montgomery to keep them out of the Olympics
this summer. The circumstantial evidence against them comes from the
federal government's investigation into BALCO.

But the leaked evidence - from e-mails to financial transactions -
falls far short of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, some
critics say. "Nonanalytical positive has to be credible evidence,"
says James Coleman, a professor at Duke School of Law in Durham,
N.C., who helped craft USA Track & Field's drug-testing program.
"It's not that [Jones] considered taking drugs, or that she hung
around people who took drugs. It has to be proof that she, in fact,
did [take drugs]. …